三大住房
我们征税、禁止、监管，扼杀了住房建设。政客、评论家以及不建房的学者们将住房问题归咎于“炒房者、外国买家、短期租赁提供商和投机者”，这引发了公众和媒体的讨论。
讽刺的是，加拿大人经常在HGTV上观看许多热门的房屋翻新节目，这些节目由省级和联邦政府的税收抵免补贴。加拿大人也是美国房地产最大的外国买家来源国。想想那些在南方拥有公寓的“雪鸟族”吧。
如今人们发现，数十万套新住房的政治承诺不过是空谈。真相是什么？与每年通过大规模移民吸引到这里的数百万人相比，实际建造的新房数量严重不足，远高于任何一个七国集团国家。
以下是三种已被证明可以解决住房问题的解决方案。
加快住房审批
更快地批准住房：时间就是金钱。
各国政府一边高谈阔论“加快”审批流程，一边却又出台更多法规，比如“绿色建筑”，导致成本翻倍。加州刚刚冻结了新的建筑规范六年。
强制将市政住房审批时间缩短至几周，而不是几年。审批时间越长，建筑商的（持有）成本就越高， 每年大约增加8%到10% ， 例如抵押贷款利息、年度房产税、保险、专业顾问、人工等等。一些建筑商甚至要为那些在等待拆除和公寓建筑许可的工地上用木板封住、鼠患频发的房屋缴纳“空置房”税。
更多解决方案在这里。
更快地批准住房：时间就是金钱。
各国政府一边高谈阔论“加快”审批流程，一边却又出台更多法规，比如“绿色建筑”，导致成本翻倍。加州刚刚冻结了新的建筑规范六年。
强制将市政住房审批时间缩短至几周，而不是几年。审批时间越长，建筑商的（持有）成本就越高， 每年大约增加8%到10% ， 例如抵押贷款利息、年度房产税、保险、专业顾问、人工等等。一些建筑商甚至要为那些在等待拆除和公寓建筑许可的工地上用木板封住、鼠患频发的房屋缴纳“空置房”税。
更多解决方案在这里。
取消租金管制
Remove rent controls (government-set caps on annual rent increases) for new apartments. Alberta has none, meaning higher vacancy rates (more choice) and lower rents. A healthy vacancy rate is 3% or above. National vacancy rates for secured rental apartments (purpose-built) range from about 1% to 2%.
-
Quebec and Ontario removed some rent controls. This stimulates new building and helps rental providers keep up with rising property repair costs, insurance premiums & taxes that grossly exceed government rental increase limits.
-
Proof? A respected survey of economists on the left and right of political spectrum agree rent controls are destructive. Ninety-three per cent agreed rent controls impact the "quantity and quality of housing" available.
-
A Toronto-based public policy analyst studied Sweden's rent control disaster where tenants wait as long as 14 years for an apartment. Assar Lindbeck, Stockholm University economics professor famously noted: “In many cases, rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”
More solutions here.
聆听房屋建筑商、税务专家、学者和意见领袖的意见
在这里或网站任何地方出现并不意味着正式加入联盟或获得认可。
聆听房屋建筑商、税务专家、学者和意见领袖的意见
From costly, ideological "green building" schemes for virtue-signaling labels like LEEDS PLATINUM that fail to deliver the energy benefits they promise, to additional policies that drive up costs for builders and buyers, learn more by watching the below videos. Read the professional engineer Greg Wilson's summary.
聆听房屋建筑商、税务专家、学者和意见领袖的意见
聆听房屋建筑商、税务专家、学者和意见领袖的意见
Greg Wilson, a professional engineer, describes how "green building" is a false premise that adds significant costs to housing and other projects without delivering the promised energy benefits.
Architects, builders, and politicians worship at the green altar of LEED, a false god. LEED was created in the late 1990s by the US Green Building Council (USGBC) as a way to promote energy-efficient construction techniques. To receive a LEED plaque, a building must earn points for various environmental attributes. Over time, these points have expanded beyond high-efficiency furnaces and triple-glazed windows to include a variety of clearly political objectives, such as the promotion of electric cars, public transit, and “social health and equity.
-
Rising Costs and Delays: government-mandated environmental standards—such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Gold or Platinum—drive up public infrastructure budgets and cause project delays. Studies show the additional construction costs range from 2% to 20%.
-
And that doesn’t include fees charged by LEED-certified specialists to scrutinize project plans. Seattle-based architect Galen Page says: “It costs US$250,000 on a fairly small project to just monitor and document the LEED process.” He encourages his clients to focus on more practical matters. He avoids green roofs in all his plans. The best roof, he noted, is a sloped metal design that removes water and snow quickly and efficiently. It may not earn any LEED points, but it’s cheap and keeps the building underneath dry.
-
Case Study (Saanich, B.C.): A planned $26 million replacement for Fire Station Two (approved in 2019) hit major snags and budget issues. Saanich city council had to up the budget to $44.6 million, arguably the most expensive firehall ever constructed in Canada. Because local council mandated LEED standards and trendy mass timber construction, the project is years delayed.
-
Questionable Performance: Expensive "green" features—such as mass timber framing or green vegetated roofs—often fail to deliver promised long-term energy savings and can suffer from practical flaws, like roof leaks and complex maintenance. LEED status is no guarantee of green performance. Certification is awarded before construction and is based on modeling projections. A 2009 study by the National Research Council of Canada found LEED status was often irrelevant to observed building performance, given that “28–35% of LEED buildings used more energy than their conventional counterparts.” A 2020 report commissioned by BC Housing and the University of Victoria examined 10 social housing projects certified LEED Gold. Only two met or exceeded their modeled results. “The other eight consumed between 22.1% and 281.7% more energy than models predicted,” the report found.
-
Taxpayer Burden: these initiatives are ideological "grifts" that prioritize trendy sustainability labels and political posturing over practical engineering, fiscal responsibility, and functional public infrastructure.
Watch the Green Building video for a summary. Full article in C2C Journal.
